Shanahan: Garcon "was best wide out in free agency"

[dw49]

We didn't trade up to get Hilton. We traded up to get CB Casey Hayward but the Packers drafted him a few spots before our pick.

Your a bit confused and it's because Grigson was not clear about what actually happened in the draft. He said "we got in position to take the CB" and he went a pick or two before us. " This would lead you to belive they made a trade but it wasn't the case. Sacey Heyward went at the bottom of round 2 not round 3. So thye Colts went with the second TE with the first picki in the 3rd. The other CB we missed was thought to be Asa Jackson in the 5th. The only trade up was in the 3rd for Hilton and Grigson was happy he made that move as he mentioned that he later heard that he would have been gone if they waited. But I do understand how you thought the trade up was for a CB as he said something to rhe effect of "we got in position." It should have been we "WERE" in position. Furthermore you don't trade up and miss your guy. The Colts traded up into that spot and selected Hilton. Teams don't trade up into a spot without knowing if the player they seek is going to be there. Otherwords they don't trade into spots until the pick is on the clock. Maybe the parametors are pretty much set a few spots before the pick comes up but I'm sure the "trigger isn't pulled " until the pick is on the clock.

[dw49]

Meaning we traded up 5 spots for a guy that we probably could have gotten in the 4th round and Jayron Hosley in the 3rd

Grigson in the post draft interviews seemed proud of this move as he infered that he (Hilton) would have been gone if they waited. I see why you wanted this post deleted as we couldn't have drafted both Hilton and Hosley without making a major move like giving up more in the 2013 draft. But as I said in my last post Grigson confused everyone by saying they "got" into position and the guy went a pick or two before they selected. If you look at the selections it's evident that this is not what happened. Anyway... Grigson seemed to be pounding his chest a bit about this move and he did say that he was told that Hilton would have indeed been selected if he didn't trade up. This isn't to discredit your opinion. IMO , Hilton is a bit of a risk here as he's small , played with inferior competition and has a history of injuries. Really a "wait and see" for me. Big time boom or bust.

[colts8718]

If you were playing the Saints in a SB and were up 10-0.. 3rd and 8 and Peyton Manning delivered a strike to a wide open WR with a whole lot of open field , would you rather have Garcon or Jackson be that guy ? Just breaking them a bit here but Jackson is no doubt the more reliable WR. I agree that Garcon has a lot of talent but IMO , he's a notch below Jackson. As far as taking plays off , I don't know if true with Jackson. I do know that Garcon gives a 100% every play. He's a perfect fit with Washington , but man ... pretty big contract.

That drop still haunts me

[Gavin]

Grigson in the post draft interviews seemed proud of this move as he infered that he (Hilton) would have been gone if they waited. I see why you wanted this post deleted as we couldn't have drafted both Hilton and Hosley without making a major move like giving up more in the 2013 draft. But as I said in my last post Grigson confused everyone by saying they "got" into position and the guy went a pick or two before they selected. If you look at the selections it's evident that this is not what happened. Anyway... Grigson seemed to be pounding his chest a bit about this move and he did say that he was told that Hilton would have indeed been selected if he didn't trade up. This isn't to discredit your opinion. IMO , Hilton is a bit of a risk here as he's small , played with inferior competition and has a history of injuries. Really a "wait and see" for me. Big time boom or bust.

Also I want to be clear, Hilton is very talented and if he stays healthy he could be a real force for us, it was a real risk that could pay off, I just might have done something different and probably would have but none of us are GM's so we will have to wait and see

[dw49]

Also I want to be clear, Hilton is very talented and if he stays healthy he could be a real force for us, it was a real risk that could pay off, I just might have done something different and probably would have but none of us are GM's so we will have to wait and see

yep

[dw49]

That drop still haunts me

It was indeed brutal. How would you compare it to what the Ravan fans must have felt in the AFCCG vs New England ?

[ColtsAllDay12]

Your a bit confused and it's because Grigson was not clear about what actually happened in the draft. He said "we got in position to take the CB" and he went a pick or two before us. " This would lead you to belive they made a trade but it wasn't the case. Sacey Heyward went at the bottom of round 2 not round 3. So thye Colts went with the second TE with the first picki in the 3rd. The other CB we missed was thought to be Asa Jackson in the 5th. The only trade up was in the 3rd for Hilton and Grigson was happy he made that move as he mentioned that he later heard that he would have been gone if they waited. But I do understand how you thought the trade up was for a CB as he said something to rhe effect of "we got in position." It should have been we "WERE" in position. Furthermore you don't trade up and miss your guy. The Colts traded up into that spot and selected Hilton. Teams don't trade up into a spot without knowing if the player they seek is going to be there. Otherwords they don't trade into spots until the pick is on the clock. Maybe the parametors are pretty much set a few spots before the pick comes up but I'm sure the "trigger isn't pulled " until the pick is on the clock.

My bad. I swear I thought I read an article that said Grigson traded back into the third for Hayward but I didn't realize he went in the second. My apologizes to Gavin

[RGIII]

You guys are thinking about this one too much. It's just your typical offseason coachspeak and shouldn't be taken at face value. I'm sure the coaches like Garcon plenty and he has supposedly had some impressive catches in the open-to-the-media OTAs but I don't think anyone expects him to be a world beater. It's a little unfortunate that so many of you guys seem quick to jump on the guy over something so meaningless, honestly.

Besides, Vincent Jackson was reportedly our number one target in free agency.

[Gavin]

You guys are thinking about this one too much. It's just your typical offseason coachspeak and shouldn't be taken at face value. I'm sure the coaches like Garcon plenty and he has supposedly had some impressive catches in the open-to-the-media OTAs but I don't think anyone expects him to be a world beater. It's a little unfortunate that so many of you guys seem quick to jump on the guy over something so meaningless, honestly.

Besides, Vincent Jackson was reportedly our number one target in free agency.

Heck if Garcon was back on the market right now I would take him, at a cheaper price but he is a good receiver

[dw49]

You guys are thinking about this one too much. It's just your typical offseason coachspeak and shouldn't be taken at face value. I'm sure the coaches like Garcon plenty and he has supposedly had some impressive catches in the open-to-the-media OTAs but I don't think anyone expects him to be a world beater. It's a little unfortunate that so many of you guys seem quick to jump on the guy over something so meaningless, honestly.

Besides, Vincent Jackson was reportedly our number one target in free agency.

Just having a little talk about nothing of real importance. If stuff like this bothers you and you really feel it's "unfortunate" that we felt like discussing Shanahan's evaluation , consider taking the obvious route.

[IndyTrav]

You guys are thinking about this one too much. It's just your typical offseason coachspeak and shouldn't be taken at face value. I'm sure the coaches like Garcon plenty and he has supposedly had some impressive catches in the open-to-the-media OTAs but I don't think anyone expects him to be a world beater. It's a little unfortunate that so many of you guys seem quick to jump on the guy over something so meaningless, honestly.

Besides, Vincent Jackson was reportedly our number one target in free agency.

It would be my guess that the man who gave him that astronomically absurd contract would expect him to be a world beater......

I love the word "potential" esp when used for players 5years into the league.

Jackson was never the #1 target. That was Gates.

Pierre will probably finish his career in the next 5 years after continually going 40-70rec for 500-800yds and 3-7TDs and that will be that.

[Superman]

You guys are thinking about this one too much. It's just your typical offseason coachspeak and shouldn't be taken at face value. I'm sure the coaches like Garcon plenty and he has supposedly had some impressive catches in the open-to-the-media OTAs but I don't think anyone expects him to be a world beater. It's a little unfortunate that so many of you guys seem quick to jump on the guy over something so meaningless, honestly.

Besides, Vincent Jackson was reportedly our number one target in free agency.

Who's being jumped on?

We're debating Garcon's value and his potential, and we know him better than you do. I really hope he works out for you, but I'm glad we didn't give him $42 million.

[Moncrief]

What's the deal with Mike Wallace. Is he still looking for a contract or has he signed his tender?

[RGIII]

Heck if Garcon was back on the market right now I would take him, at a cheaper price but he is a good receiver

Yeah, the price is no bargain... but free agency almost never is a bargain when it comes to players who are both reasonably productive and are entering or still in their prime. The money Garcon is getting is really just about the market average for any receiver with some name recognition at this point. It's right in line with the contracts earned over the last three offseasons by Marques Colston, Santonio Holmes, Sidney Rice, and Miles Austin.

The only real bargains to be had in free agency are when you take chances on guys who have not been super productive but are still talented and project well to your scheme.

Who's being jumped on?

We're debating Garcon's value and his potential, and we know him better than you do. I really hope he works out for you, but I'm glad we didn't give him $42 million.

General observation. Any time I've seen Garcon mentioned on this board a lot of people seem to pop out of the woodwork to comment negatively on the guy. It just seems a little strange to me given that, to my knowledge, he didn't leave on particularly bad terms and you got a pretty good yield out of him with your late round draft pick.

Just having a little talk about nothing of real importance. If stuff like this bothers you and you really feel it's "unfortunate" that we felt like discussing Shanahan's evaluation , consider taking the obvious route.

It doesn't bother me on any appreciable level.

What's the deal with Mike Wallace. Is he still looking for a contract or has he signed his tender?

Last I heard it didn't sound like he was going to sign his tender any time soon. He'll probably miss a healthy chunk of training camp.

[SilentHill]

My problem with WR Pierre Garcon: He will make an acrobatic, freak of nature, 3rd & long catch for a vital 1st down & then fumble & drop an easy throw & nice pass right on the jersey numbers. I don't get it & it used to drive me nuts. :pullhair:

My sentiments exactly.

[RGIII]

My sentiments exactly.

That's how I used to feel about Brandon Lloyd as a Skin. Broncos fans never had reason to share that sentiment, though

[Superman]

General observation. Any time I've seen Garcon mentioned on this board a lot of people seem to pop out of the woodwork to comment negatively on the guy. It just seems a little strange to me given that, to my knowledge, he didn't leave on particularly bad terms and you got a pretty good yield out of him with your late round draft pick.

Anytime your 6th rounder winds up getting signed for $42 million, it says he turned out well for his draft stock. And no, he didn't leave on bad terms. Like I said, I hope he does well. I have no ill-will toward him.

But, his major issue while he was here was inconsistent pass-catching. And his 3rd down drop in the Super Bowl was the beginning of a big momentum shift at a time when the Colts were in control. That's just the biggest one. He's not a complete player, by any means. I personally think he was our third best receiver, behind Reggie and Austin.

So it's no surprise that when Shanahan says he was the best receiver available in free agency, people here on a Colts board, who are very familiar with his shortcomings, are ready to rebut that comment. You won't hear anyone question Garcon's toughness or fearlessness; Shanahan was spot on there. I'll never forget Manning throwing a pick in the Ravens playoff game in 2009, and Garcon coming from behind to knock the ball out and force a fumble. But, for $42 million, I'd rather have Colston or Jackson than Garcon, that's for sure.

[IndyTrav]

I was discussing with a friend. Perhaps others can help us out.

Can anyone name a WR in today's modern NFL whom it took 5 years for the "potential" to finally be reached?

[Superman]

I was discussing with a friend. Perhaps others can help us out.

Can anyone name a WR in today's modern NFL whom it took 5 years for the "potential" to finally be reached?

Garcon essentially red-shirted his first year, so he's really just going into his 4th year.

Reggie didn't really do anything noteworthy until his 4th year, although you could see he was good right away. Joe Horn didn't do anything until his 5th year, when he switched teams, and his quarterback was Jeff Blake and Aaron Brooks. Muhsin Muhammed took three or four years to get going.

[IndyTrav]

Garcon essentially red-shirted his first year, so he's really just going into his 4th year.

Reggie didn't really do anything noteworthy until his 4th year, although you could see he was good right away. Joe Horn didn't do anything until his 5th year, when he switched teams, and his quarterback was Jeff Blake and Aaron Brooks. Muhsin Muhammed took three or four years to get going.

If Garçon red shirted his first year, then Horn did his first 2. But I shudder at those comparisons. Ugh. I'm glad we didn't give him that $.

But basically me and a buddy began discussing the immediate, or near immediate impact WR have begun to make where as in the past it was generally the 3yr rule. Now, guys are coming in an ready to go.

[Superman]

If Garçon red shirted his first year, then Horn did his first 2. But I shudder at those comparisons. Ugh. I'm glad we didn't give him that $.

Meh; doesn't change the timeline.

I'm glad we didn't give him that money also, but I think Joe Horn's first five years in NO would be worth $42 million in the NFL today: averaged 87 catches, 1257 yards, 9 touchdowns, and with Aaron Brooks as the primary passer. And Horn was older than Garcon is.

But basically me and a buddy began discussing the immediate, or near immediate impact WR have begun to make where as in the past it was generally the 3yr rule. Now, guys are coming in an ready to go.

Absolutely true. AJ Green, for instance. The passing rules opened up the game, and teams throw a lot more often now. All the passing and receiving records are in play, I think, especially since players don't necessarily have to go through a three year seasoning period before they start performing at a high level.

[RGIII]

I was discussing with a friend. Perhaps others can help us out.

Can anyone name a WR in today's modern NFL whom it took 5 years for the "potential" to finally be reached?

I mentioned one guy above, Brandon Lloyd took about 8 seasons. Another former Bronco who took about as long as Lloyd to really blossom was Ed McCaffrey. Keenan McCardell, Derrick Mason, and Wes Welker each took about five seasons. Hines Ward took at least four years...

It's really not that uncommon.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

Garcon is fine he is tough will block runs very well after the catch & will make some great catchs!! He will also drop some ball for NO REASON. But he had a good year last year & I think he will continue to get even better. He is not wroth 42 millon though & I like the guy.

[Superman]

I mentioned one guy above, Brandon Lloyd took about 8 seasons. Another former Bronco who took about as long as Lloyd to really blossom was Ed McCaffrey. Keenan McCardell, Derrick Mason, and Wes Welker each took about five seasons. Hines Ward took at least four years...

It's really not that uncommon.

Would you be happy with the contract your team just gave Pierre Garcon if he turns out to be Ed McCaffrey? I liked McCaffery a lot, but I don't think he would be worth that kind of money.

Everyone else on that list benefited from a quarterback change, it seems. I think guys like Hines Ward and Derrick Mason were highly esteemed by their teams, and you could see how good they were going to be. Kind of hard to compare them from ten or fifteen years ago, off memory. And if Garcon performs like they did, he'll be worth the money. He could. I just don't think he's that good.

[RGIII]

Would you be happy with the contract your team just gave Pierre Garcon if he turns out to be Ed McCaffrey? I liked McCaffery a lot, but I don't think he would be worth that kind of money.

I'd pay that much money in today's NFL for 1998-2002 McCaffrey production in a heartbeat. It would be very similar to signing Colston in terms of age and ability. Unlike many of you all, I don't think it's really that ridiculous of a sum anyway. That could just be because I'm used to seeing my team spend in free agency but, to reiterate, it's also pretty much the market rate for relatively productive receivers right now.

Spending that dough on Garcon is a little bit risky, for sure, but there's also a higher potential reward than you would get with a guy like Colston, especially given the way our team is currently constructed. The name of the game for 2012 appears to be speed.

Everyone else on that list benefited from a quarterback change, it seems. I think guys like Hines Ward and Derrick Mason were highly esteemed by their teams, and you could see how good they were going to be. Kind of hard to compare them from ten or fifteen years ago, off memory. And if Garcon performs like they did, he'll be worth the money. He could. I just don't think he's that good.

Well, it's a good thing Garcon will be changing from Painter to Griffin then. ;)

If Garcon's problem is route running and inexplicable drops at inopportune times (as opposed to just plain old bad hands) then I'm not too worried. That sounds more like a concentration thing and both of those can actually improve with experience and coaching. That's basically what happened with Brandon Lloyd, who was always immensely talented and could make some of the most ridiculous catches you'll ever see but had major lapses in concentration (both on and off the field) that kept him from being a factor for much of his career.

[IndyTrav]

I mentioned one guy above, Brandon Lloyd took about 8 seasons. Another former Bronco who took about as long as Lloyd to really blossom was Ed McCaffrey. Keenan McCardell, Derrick Mason, and Wes Welker each took about five seasons. Hines Ward took at least four years...

It's really not that uncommon.

Welker took 4, 3 if you go by not playing his first yr, and his 3rd was equal to what Garçon has done.

Mcardel was drafted in 1992, he played "the old game". WR circa 2002 forward produce nearly instantaneously.

Lloyd is a massive reach.

Ward didn't play his first year and was on the premier run first/second/third option for his first 10yrs. (Funny Ward note to back up my Hines before Marvin in the HoF Arguement. He played

3 more years than Marvin, his team still attempted something like 400less passes.)

The first year Derrick Mason started more than 2 games,he was an All-Pro.

[RGIII]

Welker took 4, 3 if you go by not playing his first yr, and his 3rd was equal to what Garçon has done.

What's the problem here? Welker broke out in his fifth season, jumping from 687 yards in his fourth to 1175. Garcon is going in to his fifth season after a fourth where he tallied 947 yards.

Mcardel was drafted in 1992, he played "the old game". WR circa 2002 forward produce nearly instantaneously.

You're exaggerating a little here but I won't contest the notion that teams are generally less patient today than 15 or 20 years ago.

Lloyd is a massive reach.

Why?

Ward didn't play his first year and was on the premier run first/second/third option for his first 10yrs. (Funny Ward note to back up my Hines before Marvin in the HoF Arguement. He played

3 more years than Marvin, his team still attempted something like 400less passes.)

This is a fair point. The Kordell Stewart years were... well, they were not a good time for the Steelers to be throwing the ball.

The first year Derrick Mason started more than 2 games,he was an All-Pro.

And you assume that he was truly ready from the get go and that the Titans inexplicably kept him benched until his fourth year?

Being dismissive for the sake of being dismissive is weak.

[IndyTrav]

What's the problem here? Welker broke out in his fifth season, jumping from 687 yards in his fourth to 1175. Garcon is going in to his fifth season after a fourth where he tallied 947 yards.

You're exaggerating a little here but I won't contest the notion that teams are generally less patient today than 15 or 20 years ago.

Why?

This is a fair point. The Kordell Stewart years were... well, they were not a good time for the Steelers to be throwing the ball.

And you assume that he was truly ready from the get go and that the Titans inexplicably kept him benched until his fourth year?

Being dismissive for the sake of being dismissive is weak.

I'm not being dismissive to be dismissive. I'm simply saying that in today's NFL a WR is producing nearly instantaneously.

If people want to say, well Garçon didn't play his first year, then the same applies for the previously mentioned WR. Guys like Welker/Ward/Mason etc.

And hows is Lloyd not a reach. He had a fantastic 2010. Not taking that away from him. But when 16 of your career games account for 24% of your rec, 30% of your yards and 35% of your career TDs. Lloyd may be talented, but as it stands now he's a flash in the pan. As much as it pains me to say it, I'd probably take Garçon over Lloyd any day.

[RGIII]

I'm not being dismissive to be dismissive. I'm simply saying that in today's NFL a WR is producing nearly instantaneously.

If people want to say, well Garçon didn't play his first year, then the same applies for the previously mentioned WR. Guys like Welker/Ward/Mason etc.

Unlike everyone else, I didn't arbitrarily throw out red-shirt seasons to make my point fit. Welker and Mason both were in the league for four full seasons before breaking out big time. It's the exact same thing for Garcon... except Garcon has been even more productive to date.

Will he break out in his fifth season? No idea but it isn't implausible.

And hows is Lloyd not a reach. He had a fantastic 2010. Not taking that away from him. But when 16 of your career games account for 24% of your rec, 30% of your yards and 35% of your career TDs. Lloyd may be talented, but as it stands now he's a flash in the pan. As much as it pains me to say it, I'd probably take Garçon over Lloyd any day.

We'll see how he does with Tom Brady at QB, I suppose. If Garcon has more talent than Lloyd then I think that the contract we gave him was a bargain.

[Gavin]

Unlike everyone else, I didn't arbitrarily throw out red-shirt seasons to make my point fit. Welker and Mason both were in the league for four full seasons before breaking out big time. It's the exact same thing for Garcon... except Garcon has been even more productive to date.

Will he break out in his fifth season? No idea but it isn't implausible.

We'll see how he does with Tom Brady at QB, I suppose. If Garcon has more talent than Lloyd then I think that the contract we gave him was a bargain.

Could make a case Pierre Garcons breakout year came in his 3rd year because he had the same number of touchdowns in his 3rd year as he did in his 4th he just had 163 more yards in his 4th year

[RGIII]

Could make a case Pierre Garcons breakout year came in his 3rd year because he had the same number of touchdowns in his 3rd year as he did in his 4th he just had 163 more yards in his 4th year

True. He really doesn't have to do a whole lot more than what he's already proven to be able to do for me to feel like it was a good deal. So long as he can be a vertical threat, crack 1000 yards a season, and perhaps clean up the drops just a little the price is well worth it.

[Gavin]

True. He really doesn't have to do a whole lot more than what he's already proven to be able to do for me to feel like it was a good deal. So long as he can be a vertical threat, crack 1000 yards a season, and perhaps clean up the drops just a little the price is well worth it.

I agree, but the problem I forsee with the Skins is that offensive Line combine that with a rookie quarterback, gave up 41 sacks last year

[RGIII]

I agree, but the problem I forsee with the Skins is that offensive Line combine that with a rookie quarterback, gave up 41 sacks last year

[Kenny]

I live about 3 hours south of DC, just might have to drive up there n see if hes living up to that paycheck with my own eyes. I do wish him the best, but saying he was the best available makes me laugh from a good place

[Jay Kirk]

My problem with WR Pierre Garcon: He will make an acrobatic, freak of nature, 3rd & long catch for a vital 1st down & then fumble & drop an easy throw & nice pass right on the jersey numbers. I don't get it & it used to drive me nuts. :pullhair:

Your not alone Brother in the driving you nuts,has to be a mental thing,lack of concentration ,something you shouldnt expect in a good wideout :hmm:

[hawkeyes]

How many balls were thrown to Garcon as a Colt? How many balls that were in his hands did he drop?

He had 70 receptions for 947 yards last season without Manning tossing the ball. Love to see how many legit attempts he had and how many times he actually dropped one he should have caught. IMO Colts fans are being way to harsh on the guy - I hope he tears it up in Washington.

[Mameluc]

you do realize that Irsay that Mathis and Garcon were the focus of the offseason? not Wayne, and that we went after Wayne once Pierre was lost.

im not saying he is a HOF, but I think its obvious what evaluator think of him when we didnt want to let him go and the redskins went for him hard.

i think he will fit just fine on a WCO, his phisicallity will aid him

[dw49]

you do realize that Irsay that Mathis and Garcon were the focus of the offseason? not Wayne, and that we went after Wayne once Pierre was lost.

im not saying he is a HOF, but I think its obvious what evaluator think of him when we didnt want to let him go and the redskins went for him hard.

i think he will fit just fine on a WCO, his phisicallity will aid him

In all fairness to Wayne , he probably was the "second" choice as the Colts were (are) in a rebulliding mode. Once we lost Garcon , they probably re-thought it and decided that Wayne was a better option than the younger WR's that were left in free agency. Also maybe figured that Wayne would be a nice "security blanket" for Luck. So... I think the major factor in choosing Garcon over Wayne was the state of the team relative to the ages of the two players. I wonder if the "pecking order" would have been the same if they retained Manning ?

BTW.. I agree with you and the others that think Garcon will be fine with the Skins. As far as the money , over paying for sought after free agents is part of the process. I'm sure next year we will sign a high priced Free agent ot two and guess what ? We will pay through our beaks.

[RGIII]

How many balls were thrown to Garcon as a Colt? How many balls that were in his hands did he drop?

He had 70 receptions for 947 yards last season without Manning tossing the ball. Love to see how many legit attempts he had and how many times he actually dropped one he should have caught. IMO Colts fans are being way to harsh on the guy - I hope he tears it up in Washington.

In 2011 Garcon was targeted 140 times. I can't dig up numbers on what his drop rate on catchable balls was for the season but he was neither outstanding nor utterly atrocious in that department (i.e., out of 90 receivers who accumulated meaningful stats he was neither in the top 20% nor in the bottom 20% per PFF).

In 2010 he had 13 drops on 85 catchable balls which was good for putting him near the bottom of the list of receivers who had 50+ catchable passes thrown their way. However, he was in pretty good company because Steve Smith (the good one), DeSean Jackson, Jordy Nelson, Wes Welker, Brandon Marshall, Miles Austin, and Stevie Johnson were all right there with him.

In the period from 2008-2010 Colston and Garcon actually have an identical drop rate although Colston has improved each of the last two seasons and was one of the best in 2011. That's not really bad news at all for Garcon.